My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
12
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2017
>
030717
>
12
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/1/2017 3:00:33 PM
Creation date
3/1/2017 9:51:27 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
AGENDA REPORT
DOCUMENT DATE
3/7/2017
DESTRUCT DATE
15Y
DOCUMENT NO
12
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
179
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Mr. Whalen replied that what they are planning for is adequate. He noted that if it is <br /> feasible, BRE could build it, but ultimately it comes down to what the City wants. He <br /> indicated that there is a product that hits that and right now can be built. <br /> Commissioner Blank inquired if all three parcels should have the same restriction. <br /> Chair Narum replied that she is only interested in Parcel 2 and thinks each parcel <br /> should have its own restriction. <br /> Commissioner O'Connor stated that whatever is decided, he thinks the average should <br /> be the same on all three parcels. <br /> Commissioner O'Connor asked Mr. Wayland if BRE would be supportive of putting no <br /> more than an average of 35 or 40 units to an acre. <br /> Mr. Wayland replied that 35 to 40 units would be fine from his perspective and based on <br /> what can be built on the parcel. He indicated that he cannot speculate on the future, but <br /> he reiterated that the Commission should indicate what it wants and be clear about it <br /> because if BRE does not come through and build now, and five to ten years from now, a <br /> developer comes in with a higher density, there will be an issue. <br /> John Steinbuch, W. B. Carey, owner of Parcel 1 , confirmed that BRE has an option to <br /> purchase Parcel 1 but W.B. Carey owns the parcel. He indicated that he would not <br /> want the density capped at 35 or 40 units because if BRE were to go away, the parcel <br /> might not be developed for a number of years, and given its location, it might warrant a <br /> higher density at that time. <br /> THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. <br /> Commissioner Olson stated that he does not understand why the Commission would <br /> not want to maintain that flexibility. <br /> Commissioner Pearce indicated that she understands what Chair Narum is saying <br /> about the houses across the street from Parcel 2. She noted, however, that Owens <br /> Drive is a big street, and if the City maintains its flexibility, not only is it putting more <br /> people on the properties to make the retail more viable, but houses will be needed for <br /> the people. She added that the City gets new numbers every year, and this is a perfect <br /> infill property to allow the flexibility to put units in a design-appropriate way. She stated <br /> that she does not see a problem with allowing the flexibility. <br /> Chair Narum indicated that she does not disagree with that. She questioned, if projects <br /> for all three parcels came in with an average of 50 Or 55 units, if this would be what the <br /> City wants for this particular area. <br /> EXCERPT: PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, January 26, 2011 Page 24 of 40 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.